A Questionnaire to Assess the Relevance and Credibility of Observational Studies to Inform Health Care Decision Making: An ISPOR-AMCP-NPC Good Practice Task Force Report

被引:86
|
作者
Berger, Marc L. [1 ]
Martin, Bradley C. [2 ]
Husereau, Don [3 ,4 ,5 ]
Worley, Karen [6 ]
Allen, J. Daniel [7 ]
Yang, Winnie [8 ]
Quon, Nicole C. [9 ]
Mullins, C. Daniel [10 ]
Kahler, Kristijan H. [11 ]
Crown, William [12 ]
机构
[1] Pfizer, Real World Data & Analyt, New York, NY USA
[2] Div Pharmaceut Evaluat & Policy, Little Rock, AR 72205 USA
[3] Inst Hlth Econ, Edmonton, AB, Canada
[4] Univ Ottawa, Dept Epidemiol & Community Med, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[5] Univ Hlth Sci Med Informat & Technol, Tyrol, Austria
[6] Humana Inc, Comprehens Hlth Insights, Cincinnati, OH USA
[7] OmedaRx, Portland, OR USA
[8] Blue Shield Calif, Woodland Hills, CA USA
[9] Optimer Pharmaceut Inc, Healthcare Qual, Jersey City, NJ USA
[10] Univ Maryland, Sch Pharm, Baltimore, MD 21201 USA
[11] Novartis Pharmaceut, HEOR, E Hanover, NJ USA
[12] OptumLabs, Cambridge, MA USA
关键词
bias; checklist; comparative effectiveness research; confounding; consensus; credibility; decision making; prospective observational study; quality; questionnaire; relevance; retrospective observational study; validity; SECONDARY DATA SOURCES; MEDICAL INTERVENTIONS AHRQ; RETROSPECTIVE DATABASE; QUALITY ASSESSMENT; STRENGTH; BIAS; METAANALYSIS; TRIALS; GRADE;
D O I
10.1016/j.jval.2013.12.011
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Evidence-based health care decisions are best informed by comparisons of all relevant interventions used to treat conditions in specific patient populations. Observational studies are being performed to help fill evidence gaps. Widespread adoption of evidence from observational studies, however, has been limited because of various factors, including the lack of consensus regarding accepted principles for their evaluation and interpretation. Two task forces were formed to develop questionnaires to assist decision makers in evaluating observational studies, with one Task Force addressing retrospective research and the other Task Force addressing prospective research. The intent was to promote a structured approach to reduce the potential for subjective interpretation of evidence and drive consistency in decision making. Separately developed questionnaires were combined into a single questionnaire consisting of 33 items. These were divided into two domains: relevance and credibility. Relevance addresses the extent to which findings, if accurate, apply to the setting of interest to the decision maker. Credibility addresses the extent to which the study findings accurately answer the study question. The questionnaire provides a guide for assessing the degree of confidence that should be placed from observational studies and promotes awareness of the subtleties involved in evaluating those.
引用
收藏
页码:143 / 156
页数:14
相关论文
共 13 条
  • [1] Questionnaire to Assess Relevance and Credibility of Modeling Studies for Informing Health Care Decision Making: An ISPOR-AMCP-NPC Good Practice Task Force Report
    Caro, J. Jaime
    Eddy, David M.
    Kan, Hong
    Kaltz, Cheryl
    Patel, Bimal
    Eldessouki, Randa
    Briggs, Andrew H.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2014, 17 (02) : 174 - 182
  • [3] Indirect Treatment Comparison/Network Meta-Analysis Study Questionnaire to Assess Relevance and Credibility to Inform Health Care Decision Making: An ISPOR-AMCP-NPC Good Practice Task Force Report
    Jansen, Jeroen P.
    Trikalinos, Thomas
    Cappelleri, Joseph C.
    Daw, Jessica
    Andes, Sherry
    Eldessouki, Randa
    Salanti, Georgia
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2014, 17 (02) : 157 - 173
  • [4] Indirect Treatment Comparison/Network Meta-Analysis Study Questionnaire to Assess Relevance and Credibility to Inform Health Care Decision Making An ISPOR-AMCP-NPC Good Practice Task Force Report (vol 17, pg 157, 2014)
    Jansen, J. P.
    Trikalinos, T.
    Cappelleri, J. C.
    Eldessouki, Randa
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2016, 19 (01) : 121 - 121
  • [5] Prospective Observational Studies to Assess Comparative Effectiveness: The ISPOR Good Research Practices Task Force Report
    Berger, Marc L.
    Dreyer, Nancy
    Anderson, Fred
    Towse, Adrian
    Sedrakyan, Art
    Normand, Sharon-Lise
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2012, 15 (02) : 217 - 230
  • [6] Principles of good practice for decision analytic modeling in health-care evaluation: Report of the ISPOR task force on good research practices-modeling studies
    Weinstein, MC
    O'Brien, B
    Hornberger, J
    Jackson, J
    Johannesson, M
    McCabe, C
    Luce, BR
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2003, 6 (01) : 9 - 17
  • [7] A Roadmap for Increasing the Usefulness and Impact of Patient-Preference Studies in Decision Making in Health: A Good Practices Report of an ISPOR Task Force
    Bridges, John F. P.
    de Bekker-Grob, Esther W.
    Hauber, Brett
    Heidenreich, Sebastian
    Janssen, Ellen
    Bast, Alice
    Hanmer, Janel
    Danyliv, Andriy
    Low, Eric
    Bouvy, Jacoline C.
    Marshall, Deborah A.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2023, 26 (02) : 153 - 162
  • [8] Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis for Health Care Decision Making-Emerging Good Practices: Report 2 of the ISPOR MCDA Emerging Good Practices Task Force
    Marsh, Kevin
    IJzerman, Maarten
    Thokala, Praveen
    Baltussen, Rob
    Boysen, Meindert
    Kalo, Zoltan
    Lonngren, Thomas
    Mussen, Filip
    Peacock, Stuart
    Watkins, John
    Devlin, Nancy
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2016, 19 (02) : 125 - 137
  • [9] Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis for Health Care Decision Making-An Introduction: Report 1 of the ISPOR MCDA Emerging Good Practices Task Force
    Thokala, Praveen
    Devlin, Nancy
    Marsh, Kevin
    Baltussen, Rob
    Boysen, Meindert
    Kalo, Zoltan
    Longrenn, Thomas
    Mussen, Filip
    Peacock, Stuart
    Watkins, John
    Ijzerman, Maarten
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2016, 19 (01) : 1 - 13
  • [10] Use of pharmacoeconomics information - Report of the ISPOR Task Force on use of pharmacoeconomic/health economic information in health-care decision making
    Drummond, M
    Brown, R
    Fendrick, AM
    Fullerton, P
    Neumann, P
    Taylor, R
    Barbieri, M
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2003, 6 (04) : 407 - 416